What happened to Romney just looking like a dumbass with the "Big Bird" comment? Is this really what we want to pounce on? Pick what ridiculous fabrication from a punk-ass mouth you're above harping on, Obama camp.

If it's tied to a broader movement for something, I'd support it. But please, no more of these "fight for sanity" waste-of-time protests. We have so many real issues to protest and it's so hard to get Americans in the streets. I love PBS but it would be a waste to protest just for that.

coco ebert:If it's tied to a broader movement for something, I'd support it. But please, no more of these "fight for sanity" waste-of-time protests. We have so many real issues to protest and it's so hard to get Americans in the streets. I love PBS but it would be a waste to protest just for that.

I was at the rally for sanity. It was huge and it was positive and fun. Its only purpose, if the name didn't tip you off, was to show just how common not being a shrieking cretin is, despite the news media's insistence of the opposite.

thamike:coco ebert: If it's tied to a broader movement for something, I'd support it. But please, no more of these "fight for sanity" waste-of-time protests. We have so many real issues to protest and it's so hard to get Americans in the streets. I love PBS but it would be a waste to protest just for that.

I was at the rally for sanity. It was huge and it was positive and fun. Its only purpose, if the name didn't tip you off, was to show just how common not being a shrieking cretin is, despite the news media's insistence of the opposite.

I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

coco ebert:I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

thamike:coco ebert: I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

coco ebert:thamike: coco ebert: I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

Not trying to be a dick but are you doing anything to spread your message and get people into the streets? Or just lamenting the fact that we don't on the Internet?

coco ebert:I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

coco ebert:If it's tied to a broader movement for something, I'd support it. But please, no more of these "fight for sanity" waste-of-time protests. We have so many real issues to protest and it's so hard to get Americans in the streets. I love PBS but it would be a waste to protest just for that.

Actually, it's one of the very few channels worth the funding... that and NPR.

Whodat:If PBS can't live of the licensing of the Sesame Street characters etc. they have horrible business sense. BTW, Caroll Spinney makes about $314000 a year. Big Bird is very close to being a "1%er".

I don't care who you vote for - but I honestly do question the value of government funding going to something like PBS.

If people really love crap that is on PBS then it doesn't need government funding. People will support it or they'll sell ads or do whatever else.If people don't really love crap that is on PBS that we shouldn't waste government funding on it.

I know, I know, there are lots of things more serious on the budget than this; but that doesn't change my opinion on it. Guys are making 300k a year to move their hands inside a puppet. That may or may not be a fair wage for such things; but I sure as don't see any need to fund it with public dollars. Let the market decide.

I went overseas and saw the crap they produce here with funds extorted from people with the 'TV License Tax'. Absolute crap TV with the crappy publicly funded actors making many, many times the normal wage. If they're really worth that amount of money there is no need to forcefully collect it from tax payers.

There are ENDLESS numbers of TV shows for children that are also educational that are don't funded with tax payer dollars.It's a waste.

Whodat:If PBS can't live of the licensing of the Sesame Street characters etc. they have horrible business sense. BTW, Caroll Spinney makes about $314000 a year. Big Bird is very close to being a "1%er".

You're getting Above Middle Class confused with the Wealthy 1%. Having to follow a faulty narrative out of an inexplicable sycophantic sense of duty has its disadvantages.

"Four years ago, President Obama said that if you don't have a record to run on, 'you make a big election about small things.' With 23 million people struggling for work, incomes falling, and gas prices soaring, Americans deserve more from their president."

If you want to focus on the debate then focus on how Romney lied throughout the entire debate or how he flip flopped on pretty much every position he's held so who knows what they'll get if they vote for Romney.

Gunny Highway:coco ebert: thamike: coco ebert: I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

Not trying to be a dick but are you doing anything to spread your message and get people into the streets? Or just lamenting the fact that we don't on the Internet?

I've been involved in various protest activities, yeah, such as Occupy and my union. It is possible to do both, you know- be involved and b*tch on the interwebs.

Obama4Life:coco ebert: If it's tied to a broader movement for something, I'd support it. But please, no more of these "fight for sanity" waste-of-time protests. We have so many real issues to protest and it's so hard to get Americans in the streets. I love PBS but it would be a waste to protest just for that.

Actually, it's one of the very few channels worth the funding... that and NPR.

I agree. I shouldn't say it would be a waste. If it wins back proper funding for PBS, then I guess I would support that.

thamike:Whodat: If PBS can't live of the licensing of the Sesame Street characters etc. they have horrible business sense. BTW, Caroll Spinney makes about $314000 a year. Big Bird is very close to being a "1%er".

You're getting Above Middle Class confused with the Wealthy 1%. Having to follow a faulty narrative out of an inexplicable sycophantic sense of duty has its disadvantages.

To make the top 1 percent, a household must have AGI of $343,927 or more.

Read more: Top 1 Percent: How Much Do They Earn? | Bankrate.com http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/top-1-percent-earn.aspx#ixzz29CF Vd7tk

Does Sesame Street receive that money? or does the corporation for public broadcasting?

All the reseach I have done shows that in 1981, the federal government withdrew its funding and the CTW turned to, and expanded, other revenue sources, including its magazine division, book royalties, product licensing, and foreign broadcast income.

Article is misleading. That money goes to public broadcasting as a whole. In fact it costs the CTW many millions more to produce the show than they charge to PBS to broadcast it. It is one of those win / win situations for the public and the producers of the show. The ROI on education that it provides is unmatched.

Not to mention this isn't about the budget, it's about shutting down PBS and NPR because republicans don't like science, education and the arts. Those are liberal things...

bonefish:Oh the puppeteer for Big Bird makes 314k a year? If you have a problem with it, go be a puppeteer for 40 years as a giant bird.

I don't have a problem with what anyone can earn so long as they are doing it....

1.) Legally2.) Not with my tax dollars

I'm not against having public workers. We need them for certain things. But we need to be vigilant that we are paying them a fair wage and we need to be certain that we need them. Individual people can spend their money on whatever they want. The government should be very efficient and only pay for things it needs (and only at a fair wage).

I have seen little evidence than the American people benefit from having public funding go towards paying a puppeteer. I also suspect that 314k is well above the median pay for a puppeteer, but I'm unconvinced that, even if we as a society need public funding to hire puppeteers, benefit from having high paid puppeteers over moderately paid ones.

coco ebert:Gunny Highway: coco ebert: thamike: coco ebert: I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

Not trying to be a dick but are you doing anything to spread your message and get people into the streets? Or just lamenting the fact that we don't on the Internet?

I've been involved in various protest activities, yeah, such as Occupy and my union. It is possible to do both, you know- be involved and b*tch on the interwebs.

smitty04:"Four years ago, President Obama said that if you don't have a record to run on, 'you make a big election about small things.' With 23 million people struggling for work, incomes falling, and gas prices soaring, Americans deserve more from their president."

So vote for the guy famous for leeching his acquisitions dry!

/later on we'll have a pity party and say no one could have seen it coming//just like 1987 and 2008.

Gunny Highway:coco ebert: Gunny Highway: coco ebert: thamike: coco ebert: I understand that, but what has been the long-term effect of such a protest? It didn't spark a movement, it didn't help make politics more level-headed (wasn't that the broader critique?)- ok, I guess it was just an opportunity to have fun. I guess that's cool, but it's so hard to get feet on the ground, I wish we were out there protesting austerity, the militarization of our police force, our f*cked-up foreign policy, or widespread attempts to disenfranchise voters, but I'm just a libtard anyway, what do I know...

Protests aren't immediately significant unless they are specific. The rally for sanity was not about protesting anything. It was just a reminder that most of the country is not actually made up of psychotic blowhards who want to shoot anything with a question mark.

I think I just have to accept the fact that people in this country don't feel things are bad enough to leave their homes and gather together to petition their government. They will get together for a large celebration like that rally, but not to protest. *shrugs*

Not trying to be a dick but are you doing anything to spread your message and get people into the streets? Or just lamenting the fact that we don't on the Internet?

I've been involved in various protest activities, yeah, such as Occupy and my union. It is possible to do both, you know- be involved and b*tch on the interwebs.